Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

Official Wk 1 Playoff Rankings Game Thread

13

Comments

  • OZONE
    OZONE Member Posts: 2,510
    I just have one thing to say. If Oregon or Stanford had played the same schedule as you guys, and were undefeated, Oregon or Stanford would be in the top 4.

    You guys have a ways to go still in terms of earning respect. This isn't the Pac 12's fault, this is your fault for being so shitty for the last 15 years.
  • OZONE
    OZONE Member Posts: 2,510

    OZONE said:

    I just have one thing to say. If Oregon or Stanford had played the same schedule as you guys, and were undefeated, Oregon or Stanford would be in the top 4.

    You guys have a ways to go still in terms of earning respect. This isn't the Pac 12's fault, this is your fault for being so shitty for the last 15 years.

    70
    aTm
  • digits
    digits Member Posts: 1,724
    If I'm Petersen, I'd be thinking, 'Fuck. One of the main reasons I left Boise was so I didn't have to go undefeated every year in order to get into the playoff and win a NC. Now I'm back to square one. I really fuct myself going to the Larry Scott_FS PAC12.'
  • backthepack
    backthepack Member Posts: 19,937
    salemcoog said:

    dhdawg said:

    salemcoog said:

    Lol they needed OT at home to beat Tenn and UCLA nuff said

    And we needed OT to beat a 2-6 Arizona team. Not sure that's the argument you want to make.

    A&M getting buttfucked by 19 points against Bama is what should disqualify them, regardless of where they finish the season. Unless the Aggies can win out and Bama somehow loses two games, they don't deserve to even sniff the playoffs.
    And you needed a late punt return to beat what will be a 7-5 Utah team as well.
    CPOTD!

    You'll see,


    But Doogs hate facts so I understand the outrage.
    You lost to Boise and EWU stfu until you guys can become the 2nd best team in the PNW
  • Kaepsknee
    Kaepsknee Member Posts: 14,913

    OZONE said:

    I just have one thing to say. If Oregon or Stanford had played the same schedule as you guys, and were undefeated, Oregon or Stanford would be in the top 4.

    You guys have a ways to go still in terms of earning respect. This isn't the Pac 12's fault, this is your fault for being so shitty for the last 15 years.

    70
    0-12 squared.
  • OZONE
    OZONE Member Posts: 2,510
    salemcoog said:

    OZONE said:

    I just have one thing to say. If Oregon or Stanford had played the same schedule as you guys, and were undefeated, Oregon or Stanford would be in the top 4.

    You guys have a ways to go still in terms of earning respect. This isn't the Pac 12's fault, this is your fault for being so shitty for the last 15 years.

    70
    0-12 squared.
    I haven't had so solve a partial differential equation in a while, but would that be like...

    0 - 144?
  • backthepack
    backthepack Member Posts: 19,937
    salemcoog said:

    OZONE said:

    I just have one thing to say. If Oregon or Stanford had played the same schedule as you guys, and were undefeated, Oregon or Stanford would be in the top 4.

    You guys have a ways to go still in terms of earning respect. This isn't the Pac 12's fault, this is your fault for being so shitty for the last 15 years.

    70
    0-12 squared.
    salemcoog said:

    OZONE said:

    I just have one thing to say. If Oregon or Stanford had played the same schedule as you guys, and were undefeated, Oregon or Stanford would be in the top 4.

    You guys have a ways to go still in terms of earning respect. This isn't the Pac 12's fault, this is your fault for being so shitty for the last 15 years.

    70
    0-12 squared.
    PSU says hi!
    GO CUOGS
  • OZONE
    OZONE Member Posts: 2,510
    The really funny part, and some might say ironic, is that one of the reasons you guys were so shitty for the last 15 years, is because you hired a guy that is now on that selection committee. ROFL.
  • digits
    digits Member Posts: 1,724
    OZONE said:

    OZONE said:

    I just have one thing to say. If Oregon or Stanford had played the same schedule as you guys, and were undefeated, Oregon or Stanford would be in the top 4.

    You guys have a ways to go still in terms of earning respect. This isn't the Pac 12's fault, this is your fault for being so shitty for the last 15 years.

    70
    aTm
    Sure, one could equate dropping 70 on a team as 'ass to mouth' (ATM). You bet.
  • rodmansrage
    rodmansrage Member Posts: 6,376
    gonna be super interested to see how dark sark does with being ranked 4th now, ton of pressure.

    im guessing he'll have it dialed in.
  • CuntWaffle
    CuntWaffle Member Posts: 22,499
    digits said:

    If I'm Petersen, I'd be thinking, 'Fuck. One of the main reasons I left Boise was so I didn't have to go undefeated every year in order to get into the playoff and win a NC. Now I'm back to square one. I really fuct myself going to the Larry Scott_FS PAC12.'

    If UW goes undefeated they will be in the playoff.
  • dongman
    dongman Member Posts: 2,384

    digits said:

    If I'm Petersen, I'd be thinking, 'Fuck. One of the main reasons I left Boise was so I didn't have to go undefeated every year in order to get into the playoff and win a NC. Now I'm back to square one. I really fuct myself going to the Larry Scott_FS PAC12.'

    If UW goes undefeated they will be in the playoff.
    If they don't, I will bring my band of cuogs to team up and burn down the cfbp board and melt their servers.

    That would be beating Utah, cal, USC, ASU, WSU, Utah/Colorado down the stretch. 4/6 top 25 teams down the stretch.
  • dhdawg
    dhdawg Member Posts: 13,326

    digits said:

    If I'm Petersen, I'd be thinking, 'Fuck. One of the main reasons I left Boise was so I didn't have to go undefeated every year in order to get into the playoff and win a NC. Now I'm back to square one. I really fuct myself going to the Larry Scott_FS PAC12.'

    If UW goes undefeated they will be in the playoff.
    that much has been clear. to get in with 1 loss UW would have to win the conference, A&M would have to take another, so would Louisville, and Michigan would have to beat Ohio State. even then it's still not a given.
    in other words, UW probably needs to go 13-0
  • dhdawg
    dhdawg Member Posts: 13,326
    the good news in these rankings (as a quook actually pointed out to me) is it shows that the committee has no interest in the Big-12 this year
  • GreenRiverGatorz
    GreenRiverGatorz Member Posts: 10,165
    salemcoog said:

    OZONE said:

    I just have one thing to say. If Oregon or Stanford had played the same schedule as you guys, and were undefeated, Oregon or Stanford would be in the top 4.

    You guys have a ways to go still in terms of earning respect. This isn't the Pac 12's fault, this is your fault for being so shitty for the last 15 years.

    70
    0-12 squared.
    Your shit talking has stooped to a coogfan level of dogshit.
  • OZONE
    OZONE Member Posts: 2,510
    digits said:

    OZONE said:

    OZONE said:

    I just have one thing to say. If Oregon or Stanford had played the same schedule as you guys, and were undefeated, Oregon or Stanford would be in the top 4.

    You guys have a ways to go still in terms of earning respect. This isn't the Pac 12's fault, this is your fault for being so shitty for the last 15 years.

    70
    aTm
    Sure, one could equate dropping 70 on a team as 'ass to mouth' (ATM). You bet.
    That is funny, coming from a fanbase that is so butthurt over today's rankings.
  • MisterEm
    MisterEm Member Posts: 6,685
    OZONE said:

    digits said:

    OZONE said:

    OZONE said:

    I just have one thing to say. If Oregon or Stanford had played the same schedule as you guys, and were undefeated, Oregon or Stanford would be in the top 4.

    You guys have a ways to go still in terms of earning respect. This isn't the Pac 12's fault, this is your fault for being so shitty for the last 15 years.

    70
    aTm
    Sure, one could equate dropping 70 on a team as 'ass to mouth' (ATM). You bet.
    That is funny, coming from a fanbase that is so butthurt over today's rankings.
    A few heavy keyboard mouth breathers define the fanbase now?

    Old dawgs who watched CFB pre-94 know it's awfully warm for November 1.

    5th is fine.
  • haie
    haie Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 23,662 Founders Club
    Two wannabe trolls: one whose real college is so low they play high school football and the other whose team lost to an fcs school for a 2nd straight year and is literally killing their NFL quarterback to stay in the same conversation as Washington.

    lol you fucking losers.
  • DerekJohnson
    DerekJohnson Administrator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 68,209 Founders Club
    Willingham in theory could have the Huskies ranked 12th or 14th, and no one on the committee would have the courage to challenge him. And he knows it.
  • backthepack
    backthepack Member Posts: 19,937

    Willingham in theory could have the Huskies ranked 12th or 14th, and no one on the committee would have the courage to challenge him. And he knows it.

    Barry Alvarez would.
  • OZONE
    OZONE Member Posts: 2,510
    haie said:

    Two wannabe trolls: one whose real college is so low they play high school football and the other whose team lost to an fcs school for a 2nd straight year and is literally killing their NFL quarterback to stay in the same conversation as Washington.

    LOL from the guy who probably didn't even graduate from Bellevue CC, where the majority of Husky fans matriculated.

    BTW, I also have a degree from the UW, but my college football fan association was set in Oregon before I moved to Seattle.
  • backthepack
    backthepack Member Posts: 19,937
    OZONE said:

    haie said:

    Two wannabe trolls: one whose real college is so low they play high school football and the other whose team lost to an fcs school for a 2nd straight year and is literally killing their NFL quarterback to stay in the same conversation as Washington.

    LOL from the guy who probably didn't even graduate from Bellevue CC, where the majority of Husky fans matriculated.

    BTW, I also have a degree from the UW, but my college football fan association was set in Oregon before I moved to Seattle.
    70-21 nuff said fuck off Ducky.
  • IrishDawg22
    IrishDawg22 Member Posts: 2,754
    @OZONE has reached He_Needs_More_Cock territory in this thread.
  • dhdawg
    dhdawg Member Posts: 13,326
    edited November 2016

    ATM isn't good and will lose again. I'm a little worried about what happens if Ohio State beats Michigan in a close game. Alabama, Clemson go undefeated. Ohio State and Michigan with one loss. That's the nightmare scenario.

    I can't see a michigan team that loses their division without a great SOS getting in over an undefeated UW
  • UWhuskytskeet
    UWhuskytskeet Member Posts: 7,113

    ATM isn't good and will lose again. I'm a little worried about what happens if Ohio State beats Michigan in a close game. Alabama, Clemson go undefeated. Ohio State and Michigan with one loss. That's the nightmare scenario.

    I didn't think it would matter before tonight, but yeah that concerns me now. Really though, there are four teams ahead of us and each plays at least four more games, three likely will play five. That's around 20 games and all we need is one of them to be a loss and we won't sweat a drop.

    This thread is going to look so retarded if we lose a game.
  • dhdawg
    dhdawg Member Posts: 13,326

    ATM isn't good and will lose again. I'm a little worried about what happens if Ohio State beats Michigan in a close game. Alabama, Clemson go undefeated. Ohio State and Michigan with one loss. That's the nightmare scenario.

    I didn't think it would matter before tonight, but yeah that concerns me now. Really though, there are four teams ahead of us and each plays at least four more games, three likely will play five. That's around 20 games and all we need is one of them to be a loss and we won't sweat a drop.

    This thread is going to look so retarded if we lose a game.
    not really. we know this all dependent on if UW wins out and accept that there is at the very least a 30% chance of that not happening